Thompson v. Carter

Background

Pro se plaintiff Mitchell Thompson sued Warden Carter and three other officials of the Vernon C. Bain Center at Rikers Island. He alleged that people housed in his unit lacked toilet paper, soap, and toothbrushes for about two to three days. After they raised the issue with facility staff, Thompson alleged that he was placed in restraints and taken to intake holding cells, where he experienced corporal punishment and went without food, water, or access to a working toilet for seven to eight hours. He brought the claims under the Fourteenth Amendment through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Exhaustion requirement

The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner to use available prison grievance procedures before bringing a lawsuit about prison conditions. At the Vernon C. Bain Center, the Inmate Grievance and Request Program required an inmate to proceed through several stages, including review by the grievance office, the facility commanding officer, the division chief, and the Central Office Review Committee. The inmate generally had to pursue appeals through the highest available level.

The court explained that a grievance process may be treated as unavailable if it is effectively a dead end, too unclear to use, or blocked by prison officials through intimidation or other improper conduct. A plaintiff ordinarily does not have to plead exhaustion in the complaint, but dismissal at the pleading stage is permitted when failure to exhaust appears on the face of the complaint.

Court’s analysis

The complaint alleged that the incident occurred on October 5, 2021. Jail officials received the complaint on October 12, 2021, and the court received it on October 20, 2021. Thus, only 15 days passed between the incident and filing. Even assuming Thompson filed a grievance on the day of the incident and immediately appealed every unfavorable decision, the court determined that he could not have completed a process that could take 25 days or more.

Thompson did not argue in response to the motion that the grievance process was unavailable. The court also stated that violence alone, without facts showing that officials blocked the grievance process, did not establish unavailability. The prohibition on grievance class actions likewise did not make the process unavailable because the individuals could file individual grievances.

Order

Although the opinion states that the motion to dismiss was granted, the conclusion states that the court reserved judgment on the motion pending a supplemental submission. Because Thompson was proceeding without a lawyer, the court allowed him until July 28, 2022, to file a letter alleging facts showing that the grievance process was effectively unavailable to him. If he did not file the letter, the case would be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The court did not reach the merits of Thompson’s Fourteenth Amendment allegations.